Is Rudy Running?

The Fix has made no secret of its belief that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani will ultimately decide not to run for president in 2008. But Giuliani's recent spate of activity across the country has us reconsidering.

On Sunday, Giuliani spent the day with Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) touring the devastation in New Orleans. Giuliani's wife -- but no media -- was also along for the tour. "I'm very empathetic, having gone through something that's much bigger than anybody can handle," Giuliani said afterward.

Giuliani's trip to New Orleans -- no surprise -- generated terrific press coverage, almost all of which focused heavily on Giuliani's handling of New York City following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

A week from today Giuliani will make his first trip to Iowa, which will hold the first-in-the-nation caucuses in early 2008. The mayor will be in the state to raise money for the state Republican party and Rep. Jim Nussle (R), who is the party's nominee for governor this November. "People here ... really are waiting to meet and greet Rudy Giuliani just, basically, because of 9/11," state GOP chairman Ray Hoffman told the New York Post recently. "He's kind of like an American hero."

Since the events of Sept. 11, Giuliani has cultivated an image of himself as "above politics" -- someone more interested in finding ways to lead than score political points. In a speech he delivered last Friday in London, Giuliani criticized politicians who make decisions based on focus groups and polling. "You find out what people want and then you say it to them," Giuliani said. "It feels good but it isn't leadership."

The gamble Giuliani would take if he decides to run is whether that "hero" image is strong enough to withstand attacks by more conservative Republicans against his socially liberal positions on guns, gay marriage and abortion. He is currently at or near the top of every state and national poll testing the 2008 Republican primary race, but few voters know much about Giuliani other than his service on September 11.

Giuliani is clearly aware of the difficulties in courting conservatives and appears to be seeking a remedy. The latest evidence is a stop Giuliani made in Pennsylvania last week on behalf of Sen. Rick Santorum (R).

Santorum is beloved among social conservatives for his unapologetic opposition to abortion and gay marriage. Unfortunately for the second-term senator, his outspokenness on those issues has turned many of his constituents against him. State Treasurer Bob Casey Jr. (D) has maintained a double-digit lead over Santorum for much of the past year, and the incumbent is an underdog heading into the fall. Nevertheless, Giuliani was unwavering in his praise for the incumbent. "In any age you don't have many leaders, Senator Santorum is one of them," he said.

Chuck Todd, the editor of the invaulable political tipsheet The Hotline, offered a counterargument -- noting that Giuliani recently agreed to headline a fundraiser for Ralph Reed, who is running for lieutenant governor in Georgia. Reed has fouind himself embroiled in the scandal surrounding disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, and Todd believes no potential 2008 candidate would take the risk of having his photo taken with Reed."

At the moment, The Fix believes Giuliani is using the 2006 elections as testing ground for a 2008 message that boils down to this: "I am the strongest and most competent leader in the country. While we don't agree on every issue we can find common ground to move the country forward."

Will it work? That remains to be seen -- although since Gerald Ford was the GOP nominee in 1976, the Republican Party has not nominated an abortion rights supporter. And on a nuts and bolts level, Giuliani hasn't done anywhere near the work that his potential GOP rivals have done to recruit supporters in early states like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Giuliani is nothing if not a practical politician, so he is likely to take inventory at the end of 2006 to see whether a "leadership before politics" campaign is winnable. We still tend to think he stays on the sidelines, but his activity of late shows he is considering the race more seriously first thought.

Ok, Jason. If you want to think Hillary is not collecting a $20 million war chest to funnel into her presidential race in 2008, you are free to deny reality. But if she was really not considering a run, she would be putting an end to it by now. Her has the clout to get her name off those polls showing her at 40% and she would have stopped Susan Estrich from writing that book about her run for the White House. Hillary would be reaching out to help other Democrats (like the Missouri visit taking $40,000 out of the state) instead of taking up the limited funds available in 2006.

The honesty factor will be big in New York. The voters in New York deserve to know what her plans are now, so they can accept or reject her running for the White House instead of representing them in the Senate. Even in 1998, Gov. Bush told the voters of Texas to consider the fact he might run for presidnent the following year and to keep that in mind when they voted. He won and he was honest about his plans for the future. Hillary could take a lesson on being straight about using one political office to run for a higher office.

Julie, I never said Sen. Clinton wasn't running for President so I don't understand what you mean by your first sentence. However your post does seem to me to illustrate my point about the Republicans fearing a Hillary candidacy.

Someone thinks Condi has no snowballs chance of getting elected, hmmm, sort of small-minded to deny the will of the people their right to choose the leader they want in 2008.

But then again, the Democrats are not very democratic, they would rather have union bigwigs tell them how to think or other special interest groups. Has anybody seen a poll of how Iowa voters for Hillary? If she gets to rally support, why not Condi? The right to assemble and speak freely for which person should be president is the oldest form of representative government in the world. We don't crown anyone, even Gov Bush of TEXAS had to work to get elected back in 1999 when he had to compete against 9 other candidates.

The Democrats just want to smear Condi, but she is a classy woman. Like Margaret Thatcher, and a bit more charming.

The polls show Condi is at 22% nationwide, so that is a huge achievement for her right now. Imagine how much more support she would have if she did come out to run? And Colin Powell was told by his wife not to run in 1996, I was organizing his campaign, and thousands of us were ready to rally across the nation. But we got stuck with Bob Dole, (nice guy) but not presidential material, so we got stuck with Clinton for another long long 4 years.

We have 8 years of Clinton and Clinton incorporated, and we sure don't need them again.

Giuliani is one of the few real problem solvers who may make a run, and, if anyone thinks the GOP, slumping at low tide, is not pragmatic enough to consider this man a real candidate and even hand him the nomination, they are kidding themselves.

The Republicans have been handed lemons recently. Giuliani is the lemonade. The mayor cleaned up New York. He has a legacy of chasing down the Wall Street crooks back when he was attorney general. He is walking competency, and wow -- who wants to see him matched up against Hillary or Warner?

My dear Jason, you must have missed the latest poll showing Hillary has 40% of the Democrats supporting her and if you bothered to see the millions she has raised, it would be obvious to you that she is running for president.

I think the best person for the job as president is Condi as well. Regardless of the Democrats choice, she has the most diplomatic skills than any other Republican. Can you name the last Senator who went directly to the office as President? There must be a reason voters just do not accept senator as their president, and that could be lack of executive experience. Yes, most people support a governor, but from the Pataki and Mitt Romney choice, neither of them are of interest to me.

The polls show Condi tied in national polls with Rudy and McCain, the top-tier of the Republican party. Frist is at 1% and people know who he is, they just don't see him as presidential.

I think Holly was looking at how the Democrats talk about gender balance and how the gender gap effects the election while the Democrats promote all their efforts to put women on the ticket. Well, since Ferraro failed to pull Mondale out of a deep hole in 1984, they have failed to find a woman who could carry the ticket. And likewise, I think Condi is strong enough to carry the ticket, she is the best qualified, as I see it.

Fellow Dems, did you notice the end of Holly's last post? She acknowledges, unintentionally perhaps, something that I think Democrats are overlooking and that is why the Republican strategists constantly badmouth Sen. Clinton. They are afraid of her as they feel she would have the best chance of winning and that is why you hear this Rice for President or Vice President. They think she will be the only chance the GOP has against her. Before Holly's post, I couldn't figure out why so many people were promoting Condolezza's candidacy. Now I know! It seems like the Democratic bashers of Sen. Clinton are falling into the trap of not electing the strongest candidate just like in 2004 when they did the same thing to Howard Dean. Let's hope we catch on this time.

I'm not sure Hillary is our strongest candidate myself, but isn't it intersting that the Republicans think she is?

Condi will carry the legacy of one most failed presidencies of all time. She has as much chance of becomeing president as I do. Nor does she want to be a politician. She will go back to academia where she belongs.

JD is correct, nothing unites the Repubican party more than the Hillary Factor. But there is no conspiracy by any person in the White House, the groups promoting Condi for president are real people, not the ones like George Soros making the media think it was grassroots efforts. The Condi movement has been brewing for the past year, and if you did a google search, you would find that out.
Regarding the Senate stuff, like we all saw in 2003 and early 2004, most of the Democrats running for president in the Senate missed their votes. Liberman, Graham of Florida, Kerry, Edwards, so that is 4 right there. That was a huge factor is showing why most Senators who have run for president fail, they can't do one job successfully while campaigning for another, and that is true regardless of party. Rudy might be great for fundraising in Iowa and other states with the GOP leaders, but that does win the support of the conservative base.
If Hillary is on the ticket in 2008, Condi will be there to block her. That is the real buzz right now, and most reporters are following the story.

I can't believe people are still making comments on this article, even responding to my post, a day later...

OK, here's the scenario: Condi gets confirmed as replacement VP next year after GOP gets beaten (but not hammered) in this fall's election, to groom her for 08. Then she runs as Veep to McCain, who gets the nod because the GOP is hungry again and because that's the backroom deal that W made with him to get his support the last couple years. (BTW, if GOP somehow pulls one out this fall, then McCain's Veep is Jeb, the price JM pays to get the Bush's completely on board, including the big money).

Trust me, I know how big a litmus issue abortion is for the right, but if the alternative is lose to Hillary, you'd be surprised how fast the small-gov conservatives will hold their noses and vote for Rudy (as Veep if necessary).

Greg is not a Republican, or he would not have posted this statement:
"With these three out of the way, the Repubs will look to their second tier candidates: Romney, Allen, Huckabee."

The three being Rudy, McCain, and Condi.
Why in the world would anyone want to support Huckabee or Romney? No spark and no pizzazz. Allen might win, but Condi would be his VP. That offers the balance of the ticket, and brings the "gender issue" to the GOP side, attracting more women to the ballot box of the Republicans.
The more the Democrats and liberals try to badmouth Condi, the more desperate they appear to try to demolish her credibility before 2008. Condi is the real threat to the Democrats.

Well, while reading a book about Eisenhower, (who was also drafted) he wanted his VP Nixon to step down for the 2nd term, to become Secretary of State with a record of his own in order to run as president in 1960. Ike saw the importance of foreign policy and even today, the media vets any candidate for president based on their travel to foreign nations, what success they has on foreign policy, and their influence in the world.
So if Condi decides to run by September 2007, she will have a record of success or not, which will be used for her race. If her record is good, she will become President Bush's legacy. She might also be selected as VP, and she would not have to resign from the state department until after the convention in August 2008.
Works for me.

Kim, I do not think the comparison to a Senator holds true on a Secretary of State campaigning for president. A senator is one of 100 and has no executive responsibility. Condi would have to resign if she became a candidate. Campaigning for president is more than a full time job and so is being Secretary of State. It would put a real crimp in US foreign policy if the Secretary were out campaigning. Also, Secretaries of State must be much more circumspect in their comments than a presidential candidate. I do not believe she would be a candidate unless the Condi for VP rumors come to fruition.

Remember how the right loved Colin Powell and wanted him to run for Prez before he actually told anyone his views. How quickly did that idea die? Now what do you think will happen when Rice publicly states her views on social issues? Probably same thing.

The GOP wants someone who believes in their cause and then when they help get the slob elected, he/she will do whatever they say, for example Supreme Court justices (remember how the current puppet dared to nominate his friend, boy was he in trouble).

So unless the far right can get someone that will do what they say, they will stay home on election day. McCain is right that the far right are active in the GOP and they pretty much run the place, hence Rudy probably doesn't have a chance.

You know, choices you make in life can sometimes come back to haught you. I wonder if Rudy had stayed a Dem years ago and actually tried to win a Democratic party nomination for mayor instead of becoming a GOPer so he could get to the general election, where would he be sitting today in regards to a presidential nomination??

Ok, Jim D has a good question. How would Condi be able to run for president while holding her post as Secretary of State? She would be able to do it just like the Senators (like John Kerry0 who missed 90% of his votes in the Senate during the year prior to his nomination. And since Condi does not have to vote, she would be free to fly to early primary states and speak about foreign policy and international issues.
The Far Right would accept her if her VP is Brownback or Frist or Santorum. And if the rumors swirling in DC about her becoming VP, it won't be a shock to the nation. If she wins the nomination as VP, it will balance the ticket to whomever is endorsed to run for President. Condi is the most powerful woman in the world, and she would be a full partner on the ticket.
I would prefer her as president, but I could also accept her as VP.

There are some interesting opinons posted here. I agree that a pro-choice, pro-gay rights candidate cannot win the Republican nomination and if one did that would generate a third party challenge from the far right. However, given a very crowded field, Guiliani could win some primaries based on his 9/11 hero status. There is a large pro-business, pro-defense, pro-law and order segment in the GOP who don't really care that much about social issues. McCain is actively mending fences with the social conservatives and given his huge name recognition advanatage could become the front runner quickly. He actually supports most of their issues although he has never been very enthusiastic and dogmatic about it. Name recognition is a huge factor in a crowded field and McCain and Guiliani are much better known than the other candidates. As for Condi, I am inclined to take her at her word that she is not interested. I am not aware of any very clear statements from her on domestic policy outside of one comment that would indicate she is not a hard-line pro-lifer. I also cannot see how a sitting Secretary of State could campaign for the presidency and conduct our foreign policy at the same time. As for all the Condi for VP speculation, that is an intriguing proposition. I believe it would change everything. History definitely favors sitting VPs in nomination battles. Of course, this depends on her agreeing to become VP and to run for president. How Condi on the ticket in either position would scramble the electorate is interesting. She would definitely attract more African-American votes than any other foreseeable Republican. However, a recent study of polling data from white versus black elections indicates that many white Republicans would likely vote for someone else or abstain. I also believe that the far right would not be comfortable with her because she is perceived as not conservative enough on social issues. If the Democrats did nominate Hillary and the Republicans did nominate Condi, that would maximize Condi's Republican base support due to their hysterical hatred of Hillary. Senator Clinton is an extremely divisive figure and is perceived as much further left than her record indicates. Hillary would fire up and unite the Republican base in opposition to her far more than any potential Republican nominee could in support.

Regarding the GOP nominee, I think it will end up being whoever Grover Norquist thinks it should be--he seems to be the biggest E.F. Hutton (when he talks, people listen) type among the activists, not counting Karl Rove.

I hope that Rudy or McCain do get the nomination. It's great for whatever Democrat comes through. The radical religious nuts don't like either one, McCain's recent pandering notwithstanding. So one of two things happens - they simply stay home on election day or they put up a third party nut like Roy Moore and split the right side. Either way the Dem has a tough fight against one of those two, but stands a much better chance with a split right.

I had to laugh when someone suggested that Republicans 'don't care about race' -- d'ya think the clown who posted that ever heard of the 'Southern strategy'?

Please stop speculating about Condi. Never, ever going to happen. If anything, what the party is going to do now is accentuate their xenophobia, racism and sexism -- primarily through so-called 'getting tough' on immigration and gay marrriage.

And why? Because they're trying to hang on to power -- and hate is what appeals to their base.

I agree that Rudy isn't even going to get in...or if he wants to, he shouldn't. Not only would he get destroyed by the Christian right, but all of the skeletons in his closet would come flying out.

And please...enough with the Condi Rice speculation. She isn't going to run, and in the slimmest of chances that she would, she wouldn't have a prayer. Being a candidate for office is hard...it's a bad idea to make your first trial run for political office to be for the presidency. Ask Wesley Clark.

And for that matter, I think it's possible, but NOT probable, that McCain will be nominated. While he has a conservative record, his refusal to march lock-step with the Falwell loons of the Repubs on EVERY single issue will cost him in the end.

With these three out of the way, the Repubs will look to their second tier candidates: Romney, Allen, Huckabee. And I think it will be hard for any of them to win, especially if Bush is deeply unpopular as he is now.

WASHINGTON - Not long after columnist Jack Anderson's funeral,
FBI agents called his widow to say they wanted to search his papers. They were looking for confidential government information he might have acquired in a half-century of investigative reporting.
ADVERTISEMENT

The agents expressed interest in documents that would aid the government's case against two former lobbyists for the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, who have been charged with disclosing classified information, said Kevin Anderson, the columnist's son.

In addition, the agents told the family they planned to remove from the columnist's archive -- which has yet to be catalogued -- any document they came across that was stamped "secret" or "confidential," or was otherwise classified.

"He would be rolling over in his grave to think that the FBI was going to go crawling through his papers willy-nilly," the younger Anderson told The Associated Press in an interview Tuesday.

His account is similar to conversations described by Mark Feldstein, a George Washington University journalism professor and Anderson biographer. Feldstein said he was visited by two agents at his Washington-area home in March.

"They flashed their badges and said they needed access to the papers," said Feldstein, a former investigative reporter. Anderson donated his papers to the university, but the family has not yet formally signed them over.

FBI Special Agent Richard Kolko, a spokesman in Washington, confirmed that the bureau wants to search the Anderson archive and remove classified materials before they are made available to the public. "It has been determined that, among the papers, there are a number of U.S. government documents containing classified information," Kolko said, declining to say how the FBI knows.

The documents contain information about sources and methods used by U.S. intelligence agencies, he said.

"Under the law, no private person may possess classified documents that were illegally provided to them. There is no legal basis under which a third party could retain them as part of an estate. The documents remain the property of the U.S. government," Kolko said.

Anderson died in December at age 83 after a career in which he broke several big scandals and earned a place on President Nixon's "enemies list." Authorities on several occasions tried to find the source of leaked information that became a staple of his syndicated column.

Given his history, Anderson's family might already have been skeptical when the FBI came calling.

The timing only deepened suspicion. The AIPAC investigation dates back at least five years.

"And right after he dies, they contact his widow," Kevin Anderson said.

Still, when the FBI first called Olivia Anderson and said it was a matter of national security, the family was willing to consider the request. Jack Anderson himself cooperated with the FBI from time to time, his son said.

The more the Andersons learned, however, the less willing they were to help. Lawyers for the family are preparing a letter to the FBI declining to cooperate, Kevin Anderson said. The story was first reported by the Chronicle of Higher Education.

"We don't think there's anything related to the current investigation there, based on the time frame and dad's poor health," he said. "They made it clear they want to look at everything and by the way, if we find anything classified, we'll have to remove it. I suspect that's their real intention, to get through these papers before they become public."

Feldstein, who is writing a book about Anderson's relationship with Nixon, said the attempt is part of the "greatest assault on the news media since the Nixon administration."

The AIPAC case itself has raised questions about press freedoms because the former lobbyists, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, are accused of sharing information with reporters, among others.

At the same time, journalists have been questioned or subpoenaed in the investigation of who in the Bush administration leaked a
CIA officer's identity and the Justice Department is probing who revealed the existence of the National Security Agency's warrantless eavesdropping program.

The agents who went to Feldstein's home asked if he had seen any classified documents, wanted the names of all graduate students who had looked through the papers and questioned him about where the documents are housed and who controls access to them.

"On the one hand, I think it's really disturbing to have the FBI come knocking at your door, demanding to look at things you've been reading. It smacks of a Gestapo state. On the other hand, it's so heavy handed to be almost ludicrous," Feldstein said.

Difficult politican to figure, He kept saying 9/11 on the television during election night,rather repeatedly,indeed forget not,however repeadly he kept repeating himself.And odd later in the presidents state of the nation Mr. Bush said at one point early on (we must put 9/11 behind us) than went on to repeatedly make it a point of reference. I did note and however, that Mr. Giuliani did say about the presidents response to the Louisiana tragedy that when 9/11 happened, he was out in the streets finding out what the peoples need were. He went on to say Mr. bush did not bother to find anything out until the public demanded he do so.Or call that political pressure.So at that point in time he spoke out against the president, being a republican,call that he took the step forword. I would not even think to rule out a cabinet appointment ,from the R end at some point in time,or who knows he may become a D. appointee. Or ambassador,just a thought.Without a doubt agree with the Fix,a politican to watch. What about those Yankees? !

Don't hold your breath, TexasCentrist. As I'm sure you know, the Republican party is not and never has been a big tent, or anything approaching it. It's just a claim they trot out when it suits their rhetorical purposes.

Ironically, Rudy is probably better suited for a Democratic run, but that won't happen either.

On the slim chance that the GOP stallwarts are going to allow a pro-choice candidate, there's something else they are gonna have a hard time with.

The whole mess of his public split from his wife, for example.

I imagine the hard-core fundies would have an especially hard time digesting the instance when Mayor Giuliani moved out of Gracie Mansion and temporarily roomed with a close, gay friend and his friend's partner. It was all supportive and platonic, but tell that to the rr, which doesn't allow for gays to be human.

I will say this...if he does indeed run, the GOP will be exposed fairly quickly. And that should provide for some great, not to mention revealing, entertainment.

As a centrist, Texas Democrat, I would love to see Giuliani run for president. I think that it would be great, and it would truly show just how a "big-net" of a party the GOP claims to be. Though, Giuliani should be cautiously optimistic about his chances. My guess is that he will achieve the GOP nomination, and would easily be someone's veep.

Mentioning veep spots, I was talking with someone the other day, and it seems that Kay Bailey Hutchison--one of my U.S. Senators--opted out of our gubernatorial race because she was apparently offered the VP spot on someone's 2008 ticket.

The thinking was that she would not run for Governor of Texas, because this would create a rift in the Texas GOP between the conservative Rick Perry, and the more moderate/centrist Hutchison.

Her reward for doing so would be a potential, vice-presidential nod. This would be essential and tactful, if the more divisive and polarizing senator of New York were to get the Democratic nomination.

Republicans don't want skin color to be a factor ANYMORE, grandfathering in all the ill-gotten white owned loot of 200+ years of slavery followed by 100 years of apartheid. What the heck is wrong with paying reparations to the black community for the financial ripoffs and violence they suffered from the bestial behavior of whites that was allowed under the Constitution for so long?

Given that Giuliani's liberal stances on social issues are a non-starter for the GOP primary electorate, is there any chance he seeks the presidency in '08 as an independent? Running mate could be, maybe, someone like Hagel or Nunn.

How sad that some liberals on this board are so clueless about how things work. Chris, do you honestly believe your tripe? Let's face it, the Republicans in this country are the only ones who want to ignore skin color, not make decisions based on it. You tell me whose side is racist.

As for Rudy running, I don't see his pro-choice position as disqualifying. Didn't Kerry beg McCain to run as Veep with him? Isn't McCain pro-life? If the polls stay against Bush until 08, the Republicans will be very willing to compromise on an issue like abortion if it means retaining control of the White House. 06 results will tell the tale; the bigger the damage to GOP, the more lefty the policies of the 08 nominee will be.

on the one hand, it would be interesting to see a more "liberal" (i use that term in a questionable way) Republican candidacy. With all the socially conservative candidates (from Brownback to Allen), a split vote might allow a social liberal like Rudy to pull some weight from the moderates who have been itching to retake the party platform. So instead of Condi, what about a Rudy and Christy Todd Whitman ticket? Condi has said she won't run, but Whitman has been out there stumping for the Mods. If the Democrats do well in 2006, then there might be the push to get some social liberals out there and take away some of the bite in the Democratic message (which won't be much anyway with the possible candidacies like Hillary, Bayh, Kerry or Biden). We've seen that the vehement pro-lifers will stay home if they don't have a candidate they like, which they might not get if they split their votes between all the pro-lifers. A Rudy candidacy would make Feingold much more likely for the Democrats.

Oh, wouldn't I love it if Judy Ruleiani were to run for president on the GOP side of the kooky universe! My my my, a feast of paradoxes: a "family man" who humiliated his first family in public, a "law and order" Republican who pals around with Mafia types, a "clean" politician who would have to explain his good pal. Bernie Kerik's trists using NYC government property.

Using the 2006 election cycle to test the 2008, hmmm, that sounds like what the Southern Leadership event in Memphis was supposed to be, a way to see how the delegates felt about the next candiate for 2008. But McCain, (who had no way of winning in the South) was pissing in the political pool with his $100,000 scheme of the write-in for Bush. That sucked about 140 votes away from any other credible candidate, and if you look at the Hotline list, they had hundreds of other spoiled ballots. Did they fail to make the rules clear to the voters? How can you spoil a ballot with names on it? Make scratch marks, or did someone forget to fill in the oval?
I can't think of another big event coming soon to test the political waters, but next time, it would be nice to follow some rules and only have people on the ballot who are qualifed to run. President Bush was not qualified to run, and as much as I love the man as my president, he would not be a legal choice for 2008. So McCain pissed on the Memphis ballots and the media let him get by with it.

I dislike Condi for other reasons, but the very idea of the Republican party nominating a black, never married (think about a primary version of Rove's whispering campaign against Ann Richards sexuality), pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, pro-gun control woman for President is laughable.

I mean seriously, other than MAYBE the ever shrinking country club segment of the Republican party exactly what constituency would she appeal to?

I find it laughable that some naive folks think the republican party would support Condi for president or vice-president. Polls or no polls, upon the realization that she was a woman and a black, at least 60% of those who had supported her in meaningless straw polls would immediately recoil. C'mon people, say what you will, but this is the party of folks openly hostile to equal opportunity, affirmative action, and progressive taxation.

By the way, Chris, a very perceptive analysis. The notion of using '06 to test the waters for '08 is a rings true.

One thing's for sure: If Rudy can sell this "leadership before politics" concept to the the right wing extremists who hold the Republicans so tightly by the you-know-what, he deserves to be president! When pigs fly.

Cilizza brought the subject of Rudy running in 2008. He has too much baggage and the rightwing side of the GOP won't support him as president. That is true. Now, about Condi for president. I guess the Democrats have 40% who are rooting for Hillary, and if she wins the nomination, the Republicans need to balance the ticket.
That is why Condi will be a contender, and if she is VP in 2007 to replace Cheney, I will be laughing at all the worms coming out from under the liberal rocks to try to deny Condi the VP nomination in 2008. What are you guys so afraid of? Heaven forbid that a smart woman who climbed the political ladder of success on her own merits could ever become president. The Republican party is more open-minded than the Democrats it would appear in the chat room.

Ok, Rudy is tough on crime. He cleaned up New York City during his time as mayor and was the hero after 9/11. But that makes him my choice for Attorney General or a seat on the Supreme Court. It is not my idea of a president.
Ronald Reagan was divorced, and our nation survived, but Rudy has two ex-wives and more of a liberal bent than I would like in a president.
If not Rudy, then who? There's McCain, Allen, Frist, Brownback, Tancredo, Condoleezza, Hagel, Romney, Pataki, and Newt. If politics is like a pie, there are too many slices to see any real champion for the Republicans right now.
I will need to see some leadership in the next few months before I make up my mind and donate any money to a Republican candidate for president. But it won't be Rudy.

If the people of Iowa support Rudy, that will show up at the August straw poll in Ames Iowa in 2007. That will weed out most of the names who are testing the waters now.

A poll was published in Iowa last year, and Condi was at 30%, with Rudy and McCain at less than 17% each. All others were at less than 10%. When I read that poll, my first thought was, Wow, Iowa is already thinking about 2008 and they support Condi. Howard Dean is whining about the lack of diversity in the Iowa caucus, but with Condi on the list, she brings gender and minority status to the Republicans.
I think a Condi/Rudy ticket would be great, and that should spark a huge debate on THE FIX website.
The Washington Post has a nice article about a group promoting Condi for president in the Sunday paper.
It would be interesting to see if Rudy, Condi, and McCain can speak about the leadership for our nation. I think Condi will bring her diplomatic skills to the race, and that will keep the tempers from getting out of control.
It would be interesting to see what type of discussion this blog would have if the next question would be WILL CONDI RUN IN 2008?
Rudy will make up his mind along with all the others after November 2006. If President Bush holds the majority of the House and the Senate, he won't be a lame duck either.